This copy is for your personal non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies of Toronto Star content for distribution to colleagues, clients or customers, or inquire about permissions/licensing, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com

A constitutional change approved by over 98 per cent of voters has opened the door for Rwandan president Paul Kagame to prolong his rule for another 17 years.

In a vote that was condemned by both the European Union and the United States, Rwandans overwhelmingly consented to extend term limits for Kagame, a reform of their constitution that had already unanimously passed both houses of parliament.

On Friday, the EU delegation in Kigali said there had been a lack of “sufficient time and space for debate” on the issue, with a draft of the changes “only published publicly less than one day ahead of the vote.”

“This referendum is a big step backward for democracy. President Kagame’s move toward a third term (and) persisting human rights abuses ... are damaging Rwanda’s story of recovery and rebuilding from the horrific genocide 20 years ago,” said U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce. Citing President Barack Obama’s speech to the African Union this summer, Royce added: “Nobody should be president for life … your country is better off if you have new blood and new ideas.”

Pointing to a recent Ipsos poll that showed 92 per cent of Rwandans want the president to run for a third term, Kagame said he’s simply responding to his people’s desires.

“What is happening is people’s choice,” he said while casting his vote on Friday.

It’s the latest in a series of constitutional coups in central Africa, where leaders in Uganda, Republic of Congo and Burundi have all recently prolonged their stay in power by altering or eliminating term limits.

But unlike neighbouring Burundi, where the move prompted months of violent street demonstrations, Rwanda is unlikely to see any public protest.

Observers acknowledged the referendum result as a setback for democracy, but noted that Kagame is the only viable leader and getting rid of him risked ending the peace and stability that has endured since the end of the genocide in 1994.

“There is concern that if there’s a transfer of power, that could mean more violence,” said Susan Thomson, a professor of peace and conflict studies at Colgate University in New York state. “The genocide is still a recent enough history that people would rather the stability of Kagame than the fear of what might happen when he’s gone.”

Kagame, who led the Rwandan Patriotic Front rebels into the country to stop the genocide and has been the de facto ruler ever since, has been credited with rebuilding the economy and reconciling ethnic divisions, but brokers no dissent.

Rwandan President Paul Kagame speaks to journalists after voting in Kigali. (CYRIL NDEGEYA)

International observers have taken to calling him “impressive but repressive.”

“He doesn’t need violence now — Rwandans know what they’re expected to do — but the regime is still based on terror,” said Filip Reyntjens, a professor of African law and politics at the University of Antwerp in Belgium.

“The few who show discontent or criticism are arrested or disappear, or if they’re abroad, they’re killed. The message for the overwhelming majority of Rwandans is extremely clear: don’t speak.”

Even within his own party, Kagame has purged dissenting voices. In 2013, Rwandan justice minister Tharcisse Karugarama told The Guardian that he was opposed to changing the constitution, and less than a week later was relieved of his duties.

“That was a very clear signal,” said Reyntjens.

Despite Kagame’s heavy handed approach, the international community is unlikely to do much beyond register its displeasure with strong statements.

“There won’t be any real sanctions and he knows that very well,” said Reyntjens. “Kagame probably thinks they are barking and shouting, but nothing will happen, and I guess he’s right.”

“What might happen is a palace revolution, a coup d’etat with people of his own group overthrowing him. That is more likely than anything happening on the streets.”

A polling station at the Rwandan High Commission in Nairobi. Rwandans abroad were voting in a referendum to amend the constitution allowing President Paul Kagame to rule until 2034. (TONY KARUMBA)

Rwanda is a densely populated country that has virtual one-party rule (the RPF won 98 per cent of the vote in the 2009 elections) and a geography that makes it easy to keep a close eye on the population.

“Rwanda is just too controlled,” said Thomson. “You can see everybody in Rwanda. That’s just the nature of the hilly terrain. There’s a surveillance mechanism that keeps people pretty docile.”

Kagame actively promotes his image as the saviour of Rwanda from genocide — a narrative that is easily accepted abroad and seen as the only viable option at home.

“Regular Rwandans are terrified. They know what happens when the elites start fighting,” said Thomson. “The government has so penetrated society, its reach is even into private homes and people’s minds.”

The Toronto Star and thestar.com, each property of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited, One Yonge Street, 4th Floor, Toronto, ON, M5E 1E6. You can unsubscribe at any time. Please contact us or see our privacy policy for more information.

More from the Toronto Star & Partners

LOADING

Copyright owned or licensed by Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or distribution of this content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited and/or its licensors. To order copies of Toronto Star articles, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com